Expectation and musical perception

some of my most interesting experiences were in hearing a piece for the first time that confounded expectations.  When I heard the first moveemnt of Bartoks Music For Strings, Percussion and Celesta, the strands of music that seem to have a vague emptiness suddenly coalesce into a shattering climax that left me breathless because while it did germinate from the original seeds, it did in a way that was so unexpected that it startled.  in a lesser way Mozart continually confounded his contemporaries by having his music go in directions that no contemporaries could pmatch, but always managing to make it seem a natural outgrowth of what had come previously.  Mozart is just as origian las Bartok, but the Bartok seems more daring because our brains haven't prepared us for what happens next

Very good examples...Thanks....

I will put Scriabin juggling with tonal and atonal borders as another example of supreme creativity ...

some of my most interesting experiences were in hearing a piece for the first time that confounded expectations. When I heard the first moveemnt of Bartoks Music For Strings, Percussion and Celesta, the strands of music that seem to have a vague emptiness suddenly coalesce into a shattering climax that left me breathless because while it did germinate from the original seeds, it did in a way that was so unexpected that it startled. in a lesser way Mozart continually confounded his contemporaries by having his music go in directions that no contemporaries could pmatch, but always managing to make it seem a natural outgrowth of what had come previously. Mozart is just as origian las Bartok, but the Bartok seems more daring because our brains haven’t prepared us for what happens next

"prior knowledge in the brain actually changes what we perceive when listening to music."

My take: What has been called subjectivity is actually objective, and what is objective is experienced as subjective. 

In other words: We can now get rid of the distinction because it has proved too crude. We need other terms.

It is very well described in psychoacoustics for sound and music where correlation between objective parameters and subjective impressions are never confused or conflated but distinguished.

Goethe studies in the physiology of perception for colors explore this borders between subjective and objective impressions. It was a pioneering works.

It is also well described by phenomenology of perception studies in general beginning with Merleau Ponty among others.

Then no need to ban words or replace them , only refine and contextualize their use and meanings... The concept of intersubjectivity in phenomenology is only an example, of a subjective experience or/and of an objective experience which correlate in some way in some level with one another when two subjectivity communicate in some cultural area .

 But for sure you are right about the fact that this distinction between pure  subjectivity and pure objectivity is not only crude but illusory.

In audio threads the subjective school and the objectivist fad opposition illustrate well simplistic attitude at works...

😊

"prior knowledge in the brain actually changes what we perceive when listening to music."

My take: What has been called subjectivity is actually objective, and what is objective is experienced as subjective.

In other words: We can now get rid of the distinction because it has proved too crude. We need other terms.

Of course prior experience or “knowledge” affects how we experience music.  
A whole bunch of things in our lives, experiences, memories, etc. do this.  
I just sit still and listen.  
If I don’t like it I move on.  
If I like it I inquire further.  
If I’m non-plussed I just move on with the sense that maybe at some point I’ll come back to it and have a stronger feeling, + or -